brickhistory

Where are the calls for all the folks with DUIs earned just shy of 20? Don't they deserve 'special' attention/treatment? This guy broke whatever rules he was convicted of/accepted punishment for and got caught, prosecuted, sentenced, etc. The DADT aspect is for a larger discussion or law change, but the fact of the matter is this guy, in this case, was busted shy of his 20. Thousands upon thousands of other dudes/dudettes have been in the same boat - either for being gay when any hint of that was not kosher, under DADT, for DUI, for losing classified, for falling asleep at post, whatever. For breaking a fairly strictly enforced rule/law and being punished for it. Why no calls for those to be given another chance? I really do respect the fact that this guy put it on the line flying, much less combat flying. It does not give him a pass to 20 if, as is evident by the fact that he is being forced out at 18, due to either being convicted or accepting non-judicial punishment that results in a discharge prior to retirement. If we discharge SSgts and Lts for breaking the rules, why is this guy above them? Because he's at 18 and close? Again, again, again, it would be very helpful to know the full story and facts. That may/may not ever happen. But this guy accepted, at some point in the process, the proceedings moving against him. To cry 'foul' after the fact is disengeneous at best, hypocritical at worst. To go public with his story and tieing it to the repeal of DADT is something else besides an individual's life. He knew the rules, he broke the rules, he got caught breaking those rules, he pays the penalty. This guy being a good dude and warrior aside, why is that concept not being applied by some? Write your congressman regarding overturning DADT or any other law you don't like. Until that change is made, that or any other unpopular law is liable to be applied. Now, to stir the chili just a little - and it's purely hypothetical - I don't know the guy, I don't know that he ever did/would do anything like this, but - has he ever served on a court-martial board or been a commander that had to kick somebody out of the Air Force? If so, the defendant broke the rules and this guy helped enforce those rules. One could narrow it even further to apply to a DADT case, but it doesn't have to be that example. Why is this guy above the rules as they exist now?

Guadalcanal Tarawa Schweinfurt Anzio Leyte Gulf Normandy Al Udeid Is this this generation of leadership's legacy? Seriously?!

Shoucebags. That's funny raht thar!

"Ironclaw" by Sherman Baldwin. 'Nugget' pilot in the EA-6B for Desert Storm. Not a lot of "how great am I" combined with good descriptions of carrier life, flying with a crew, self-induced pressure to be professional, and bringing it back aboard, at night, on a deck where the anti-skid coating has been worn away and it's rubber on wet steel, oil, and hydraulic fluid.

IF he accepted his commission and took the oath knowing he was gay and that trait was against UCMJ and published DoD policy, then I would argue that he did have "mental reservations" regarding his oath and commission. I'm not making my point about his or the DoD's policy on homosexuality. I'm saying that if he was gay before 1993, then the law and policy were very explicit and he still went ahead and accepted his commission and the responsibilities therein. If he became gay after 1993, then there is something more to the story I would think. As to those who would want to 'park him' in another job, why? If he can fly and fight, and you're going to keep him, why not let him do his job as he did for so long and, apparently, so well? Why does this guy merit special treatment and any other servicemember booted just shy of retirement for the same reason not? It should be the same standard for everyone. I'm a cynical dreamer...

And, if those underage were found out, they were discharged from the service. IF the guy knowingly broke the law as it then existed before 1993, then I'm not very sympathetic to his plight. He made a choice to join the military knowing what the rules were. To cry foul later is sour grapes. Him appearing on the Rachel Maddow show smacks of something political and not about this guy's specific plight. I don't know him. Some here do and vouch for him. I take their word regarding him. Sucks to be him. I have no doubt there is more to the story, however. As there is to our favorite Jill Metzger, but that never seems to get the light of day by Big Blue. I'm not a fan of the hypocrisy in the individual or the institution.

No dog in the fight, however, "18 years of service" is listed. So, if the guy was gay when he commissioned, he was before DADT. So he knowingly accepted a commission under false pretenses. Remember the "with no mental reservations" clause in the oath? Or, if he 'switched' sometime after 1993 when DADT became DoD policy, then, as mentioned, there is more to the story I would think. And, I'm sorry, it's funny that it's in the (Strike) Eagle community. Not for the guy personally, but for the stereotype.

Obviously, the T-38 had superior GCI to achieve his position of dominance over the F-22. The "fifth wingman" rules!* *just trying to get the thread to lighten up, Francis, and turn it toward the 'real' enemy,' ABMs...

CDR. John Nethersole, RN/FAA, (ret): About transitioning to jets in the Gloster Meteor:

1. Yes. Even though it was Richard Armitage, Deputy SECSTATE that leaked Plame's name, he was part of the Powell crowd and thus not a 'bad' man. Libby was as close as you could get to GWB. (also goes to show don't lie to the man because that's what gets you in trouble, i.e., he was convicted for misleading a federal agent, not doing anything illegal regarding a CIA officer.) 2. Rumsfeld resigned as a result of the 2006 mid-term elections. Since Bush couldn't resign, practically speaking, he had to go to appease the party. As to the topic, look at the bad press GWB got for flying AF 1 over the Katrina area - "doesn't care," "interfered with recovery efforts to make a political photo op," etc, etc. Hueypilot is spot on in his analysis about Him and His teflon pass from the media. Eventually, it will be His fault, but not according to the press.

I also really, really doubt that He gets a status briefing on where His ride is if he's not fragged to be on it. He (and any President) just expects it to be ready when He wants it. And major kudos to the bros and sisters who make that happen. Every time, on time. Now about the entourage He takes...

White House declines to release photos

As an aside, the one way feature will guarentee you extra attention from The Man...

OUT-F*CKING-STANDING!!!

Ok, if it's not the government's responsibility to notify the local leadership (yeah, I know some podunk mayor's aid took the call) about a flight of a large government jet cruising in a non-standard way over one of our top two largest cities and the same one that experienced another period where large jets flew in a non-standard way that caused the really, really big hole in the ground in Manhatten, then who's is it? I agree, however, that people should calm the f*ck down. But the vast majority are sheep and to expect other behavior is just a disappointment in waiting.

Anti '2.' It absolutely is in Big Blue's interest to not step on it's crank like this. Besides the impression of yahoo's with toys out for a joyride it gives, it also could have easily been avoided with just a little common sense. Several years back, a former SAC guy died. The good was that a B-52 was fragged for the fly-by at Arlington. The bad news was that no one thought of the need to tell downtown DC. Can you imagine the emotions of non-DoD folks (and believe it or not, that is the majority of DC) of seeing a big, noisy jet thundering low over the Pentagon? 9/11 redux... Fortunately, the day prior to the event, the clue light came on and local media was alerted and the timing was much publicized. Cars everywhere were stopped along the sides of the roads, bridges, etc, etc, to watch the mighty BUFF thunder by. It was a moment. Same thing could have happened for this - the faux Air Force One with the green lady in the background would have been for NYC. Now, I bet this photo never sees the light of day. 'Tards.

I f'in' love the fact that the District of Columbia neither issues nor honors other states' CHLs. As a Virginia resident, that's a real pisser. Half the time, that's where I feel I most need to be armed.

In a way, yes. Often times, the editor/writer has only so many words, i.e., so much page space, allowed to tell the story. "Virtually every pilot since 1961" is way shorter than trying to explain SUPT, T-1s, etc, etc, and since the vast majority of the intended audience are probably not guys who tracked T-1s, etc, since 1993, but investors or dudes who did train in the T-38 prior to 1993, well, I think it was as good a compromise as you'll find.

Col Doug Masters, F-22 WG/CC, approaches the UPT base for a 'show and tell' display to fire up young student pilots, not knowing that the son of one of his now deceased Middle Eastern foes is going through training.

The senior officer reverting to "like all that and sh1t" at the end...

We could take payment in beer.

CIA's Oxcart History (U) Less than 20 years after WWII, and they are doing Mach 3+.

A 365 TDY, is by every other definition, a short tour PCS. Calling it a TDY is crap. Thus my "felony" connotation.

That's not a TDY, that's a felony-length sentence.

"Bomber crush?!" WTF? As noted on the first page, it was normally referred to as a "50 mission crush," as the USAAF wheel hat had the grommet in it to keep it circular-shaped. That grommet made the headphones then in use not fit right, so the grommet was removed and the headphones worn over the now relaxed, floppy hat. After a combat tour, bomber, fighters, transports - try telling the Hump pilots they weren't in combat/doing some really dangerous sh1t or the C-47s pilots who dropped on D-Day or Market-Garden they weren't in "combat" - the hat was permanently misshapen and was the sign of an experienced veteran. I also think you'll find that most WWII B-17 and B-24 dudes wore something called a 'steel helmet' as flak protection far more than they did a hat during actual missions. Separate but related, the RAF fighter guys unbuttoned the top button of their coat/tie uniform as their version of "sticking it to the man" esprit de corps. Both services would fly missions, not all, but certainly a lot, wearing a damn coat and tie either under a bag or even without a bag. That would blow. Kinda takes the sting out of "blues on Mondays." Besides, any of the WWII combat vets earned to wear whatever the hell they wanted to wear.